Six Core Intel Core i5 8500 Spotted in Sandra

Nothing exactly earth-shattering news, but it could actually be a sweet-spot processor. The six-core Intel Core i5 8500 has some entries in Sandra, and that indicates the proc might become available ...

Buying a new processor which has the inbuilt Meltdown/Spectre vulnerabilities, how about waiting for a CPU (next generation) that fixes the issues at a hardware level with hopefully zero/less performance hit!

Bug aside how diferent is really to 8400? Those are theoritical max under perfect conditions for short amount of time asuming ideal contitions those 300* mhz for few seconds will matter for almost nothing no?

Buying a new processor which has the inbuilt Meltdown/Spectre vulnerabilities, how about waiting for a CPU (next generation) that fixes the issues at a hardware level with hopefully zero/less performance hit!

Click to expand...

If you need one now or reasonably soon, you can't wait 2-3 years for new CPU designs to roll out.

I've been saying lack of 8500 makes me recommend a budget intel build to no one ever again and it seems it finally arrived, I was pretty sure they would release it at some point.
Back in the days when I built 5+ pcs with i5-6500, it was the best budget CPU out there, 10$ more than 6400 and 500mhz higher speed, but this one has just 200-300mhz tops and there is AMD so I don't see myself recommending this one this time.

you know its just a slap in the face for all 8400 buyers. $189 - $199 just $10 difference. i bet 99% of could of dish out 10 bucks for few extra mhz. Intel always make us look stupid.

1st any one who purchased i5 7600k will look at i3 8130k and feel bad as thats much cheaper. Now this; along will all of the security issues. it like intel dont care about their customer at all. sad for both intel and buyers.

Buying a new processor which has the inbuilt Meltdown/Spectre vulnerabilities, how about waiting for a CPU (next generation) that fixes the issues at a hardware level with hopefully zero/less performance hit!

Click to expand...

Sounds like you haven't actually read up on the vulnerabilities. Let me guess, you think Gaming and day to day basic tasks are affected

you know its just a slap in the face for all 8400 buyers. $189 - $199 just $10 difference. i bet 99% of could of dish out 10 bucks for few extra mhz. Intel always make us look stupid.

Click to expand...

So what should they do? Make it actually more expensive so you don't feel bad? How is that better for the users? The specs and rumored pricing of the 8500 have been known for a long while, if you rush into a sale and then have buyers remorse, you shouldn't blame the company for that.

It's not really that much of a performance hit though...Nothing anyone would notice in real world situations at least.

Click to expand...

Well I don't think we know the true extent of the final performance hit yet, BIOS & OS patches are still being released. I know BIOS & OS update was tested here on Guru3D and for gaming & most consumer stuff it didn't make much of a difference, but I think I heard that more patches could be incoming from which we will not know the performance impact. Buying new hardware I'd prefer that bug to be fixed in hardware, rather than investing in something that needs to be patched.

Sounds like you haven't actually read up on the vulnerabilities. Let me guess, you think Gaming and day to day basic tasks are affected

Click to expand...

I've read up on it. I just don't like the idea of buying new hardware that has bugs/vulnerabilities built into it. I know gaming is not really affected, but see my response to the first post I quoted within this post - I think there could be more patches incoming that could worsen performance. I also think it's a bit rubbish that Intel is going to release some future CPUs with the vulnerability/bug already baked straight into their own hardware.

Robo9999, I agree in theory however in practice buying a bug free CPU is really really hard. Which CPU does not have any bugs? I honestly can't think of any consumer CPU's that don't have a decent amount of bugs. If you wait until Intel fixes these in hardware I'm pretty sure, if history is any indicator, new bugs will pop up on any new architecture like Ice Lake etc.

you know its just a slap in the face for all 8400 buyers. $189 - $199 just $10 difference. i bet 99% of could of dish out 10 bucks for few extra mhz. Intel always make us look stupid.

Click to expand...

It isn't Intel making them look stupid, it's the buyers that haven't learned by now. Like the article stated; "Nothing exactly earth-shattering news" -as in most of us knew better and were expecting this CPU.

Robo9999, I agree in theory however in practice buying a bug free CPU is really really hard. Which CPU does not have any bugs? I honestly can't think of any consumer CPU's that don't have a decent amount of bugs. If you wait until Intel fixes these in hardware I'm pretty sure, if history is any indicator, new bugs will pop up on any new architecture like Ice Lake etc.

Click to expand...

I see where you're coming from, but for Intel to release CPUs in the future that have this known Spectre/Meltdown vulnerability is poor - I'm thinking they should put releases on hold until they fix the problem in hardware - accelerate hardware fixes or accelerate future releases that don't have the issue. I know that there are long lead times associated with design, tape out, production, but I'm sure there are for smartphones too, and Samsung recalled & ceased production of those dangerous exploding Note 7's didn't they, and these CPUs are dangerous & flawed, just in a different way - I'm thinking Intel need to do the same, absorb this loss, gain some integrity and only release CPUs without this flaw.

The problem I guess is, when it comes to Intel, they consider the current Spectre / Meltdown bugs to be taken care of with their microcode update and windows / program patches. So they are not thinking about skipping a year without creating sales revenue... they have to give out money to the investors or they are royally screwed. They should, however, do it like you said @Robbo9999 and not release any hardware with a known bug.
The problem is that you can't compare a flaw like Intel's vulvernabilities (or AMD's / ARM's for that matter) that's a security bug with an exploding device that can possibly harm or kill people in the worst case scenario. That's instant, directly traceable, as opposed to a security flaw you might not even realise is exploited while you use your computer. That's why they can get away with it rather than having to take a full halt in their approach. By the way, when it comes to this, we would need to see Ryzen2 delayed, as well as practically every smartphone that gets the next generation of ARM based chips.

The problem I guess is, when it comes to Intel, they consider the current Spectre / Meltdown bugs to be taken care of with their microcode update and windows / program patches. So they are not thinking about skipping a year without creating sales revenue... they have to give out money to the investors or they are royally screwed. They should, however, do it like you said @Robbo9999 and not release any hardware with a known bug.
The problem is that you can't compare a flaw like Intel's vulvernabilities (or AMD's / ARM's for that matter) that's a security bug with an exploding device that can possibly harm or kill people in the worst case scenario. That's instant, directly traceable, as opposed to a security flaw you might not even realise is exploited while you use your computer. That's why they can get away with it rather than having to take a full halt in their approach. By the way, when it comes to this, we would need to see Ryzen2 delayed, as well as practically every smartphone that gets the next generation of ARM based chips.

The problem I guess is, when it comes to Intel, they consider the current Spectre / Meltdown bugs to be taken care of with their microcode update and windows / program patches. So they are not thinking about skipping a year without creating sales revenue... they have to give out money to the investors or they are royally screwed. They should, however, do it like you said @Robbo9999 and not release any hardware with a known bug.
The problem is that you can't compare a flaw like Intel's vulvernabilities (or AMD's / ARM's for that matter) that's a security bug with an exploding device that can possibly harm or kill people in the worst case scenario. That's instant, directly traceable, as opposed to a security flaw you might not even realise is exploited while you use your computer. That's why they can get away with it rather than having to take a full halt in their approach. By the way, when it comes to this, we would need to see Ryzen2 delayed, as well as practically every smartphone that gets the next generation of ARM based chips.

Click to expand...

Every CPU that exists has many vulnerabilities. They just haven't been found yet. I'd be more worried about those vulnerabilities getting discovered by the hackers before the security teams notice them.

Every CPU that exists has many vulnerabilities. They just haven't been found yet. I'd be more worried about those vulnerabilities getting discovered by the hackers before the security teams notice them.

Click to expand...

You are absolutely right.

But I am absolutely underwhelmed by how Intel handled it to be honest... no intel and still all of it feels like they are behind any "schedule" to fix it if after half a year they haven't been able to get the microcode update out to the mainboard vendors, who still dance around the bonfire with their cryptic patching politics (referring to CPUs older than Haswell for instance, or how it works out for Haswell right now, how AMD's older rigs were bugged, etc.).

It just feels like they did nothing, now they do very little, and it all takes longer as it would have been necessary. Now the hackers have time to exploit the known bug before any updates are even around. And I don't even want to imagine what happens with smartphones, people's use of them today (for everything like banking etc.), how they are more often then not lacking any protection software like a firewall, and how very few updates have been announced or even circulating afaik.

Would the upcoming 8500 chips come off the same die as 8400’s but selected for better quality that can be pushed harder or do they actually involve a new design with the prospects of Spectre/Meltdown fixes?

People give spectre and meltdown way too much credit. Guess "cryptocurrency bubble" and "meltdown" are the only media attention we get nowadays.
Oh well, let's go on another round of Meltdown and Spectre circlejerk

Would the upcoming 8500 chips come off the same die as 8400’s but selected for better quality that can be pushed harder or do they actually involve a new design with the prospects of Spectre/Meltdown fixes?

Click to expand...

There no hardware fix from Intel until next gen. Guess it requires major redesign.
Same with AMD on spectre issue. Zen+ not fixing it, since it just improvement of Zen.
Zen2 will address it.